linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] phy: Add provision for tuning phy.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 11 Dec 2013 13:47:13 +0530
From:	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>
To:	Vivek Gautam <gautamvivek1987@...il.com>,
	Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>
CC:	Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@...sung.com>,
	Linux USB Mailing List <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
	<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>,
	Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@...ux.intel.com>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
	Jingoo Han <jg1.han@...sung.com>,
	Julius Werner <jwerner@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] phy: Add provision for tuning phy.

On Wednesday 11 December 2013 12:08 PM, Vivek Gautam wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Heikki Krogerus
> <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for reviewing this.
> 
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 04:25:23PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote:
>>> Some PHY controllers may need to tune PHY post-initialization,
>>> so that the PHY consumers can call phy-tuning at appropriate
>>> point of time.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@...sung.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/phy/phy-core.c  |   20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  include/linux/phy/phy.h |    7 +++++++
>>>  2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-core.c b/drivers/phy/phy-core.c
>>> index 03cf8fb..68dbb90 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/phy/phy-core.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-core.c
>>> @@ -239,6 +239,26 @@ out:
>>>  }
>>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(phy_power_off);
>>>
>>> +int phy_tune(struct phy *phy)
>>> +{
>>> +     int ret = -ENOTSUPP;
>>> +
>>> +     mutex_lock(&phy->mutex);
>>> +     if (phy->ops->tune) {
>>> +             ret =  phy->ops->tune(phy);
>>> +             if (ret < 0) {
>>> +                     dev_err(&phy->dev, "phy tuning failed --> %d\n", ret);
>>> +                     goto out;
>>> +             }
>>> +     }
>>> +
>>> +out:
>>> +     mutex_unlock(&phy->mutex);
>>> +
>>> +     return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(phy_tune);
>>
>> I think "setup" instead of "tune" is much more clear and reusable.
> 
> I think "setup" will look more like first time setting up the phy,
> which is rather served by "init" callback.
> This i thought would serve the purpose of over-riding certain PHY
> parameters, which would not have been
> possible at "init" time.
> Please correct my thinking if i am unable to understand your point here.

how about 'calibrate'?

Thanks
Kishon
> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --
>> heikki
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
> 
> 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/